The FISA law itself is corrupt
While this story is mostly focused on the obvious fact that the Democrats were outright lying when they claimed, before the FISA memo was released, that its release would reveal information that would place the country’s security at risk, it is this tidbit that I want to focus on:
But speaking of stupid, something else occurred that few are mentioning, but may be of more significance than anything. What were these FISA judges thinking who allowed for the surveillance? They actually read the Steele dossier, one would assume. Were they imbeciles or as biased as McCabe, Strzok and the rest of that seedy FBI cabal? Whether they were told that document came from the Clinton campaign or not, it read like an outtake from the back pages of the National Enquirer — and not one of the good issues (John Edwards, etc.). The dossier was ludicrous on its face, yet the supposedly great legal minds of the FISA court accepted it as what appears to be the most important evidence for the case.
Think about that.
What we need, obviously, is the old word transparency. The public needs to see the full details of what went into the FISA decisions — and we don’t need to hear any of that fake palaver about national security. Everybody’s security depends on the FISA court working in a one-hundred percent unbiased manner. Otherwise we’re living a nightmare.
That court, and its workings, and its personnel should be a key part of any investigation going forward. New rules and regulations have to be put in place.
The author is thinking “reform.” We must dig into the workings of the FISA court and fix it so this kind of corruption never happens again.
Bah. What this scandal reveals is that the FISA law, created in 1978 during the Carter administration by a Congress strongly controlled by leftwing Democrats (following heavy election loses to the Republicans after Watergate) is itself a problem, and should be gotten rid of. The idea that a warrant against an American can be issued using secret information that no one is allowed to look at reeks with the possibility of abuse and corruption, which is exactly what we see here.
For example, the eleven judges presently on the FISA court were all appointed during the Obama administration. Though the law says the Chief Justice of the U.S. designates them, the law tilts the scale by requiring that “the judges must be drawn from at least seven of the United States judicial circuits, and three of the judges must reside within 20 miles of the District of Columbia.” Considering the political leanings of the DC area, it seems to me that this is going to make it very easy for the court to lean left politically.
No amount of dressing is going to fix this. The FISA court is essentially a Star Chamber where government operatives can use secret information to manipulate the court to allow them to go after their enemies. It is by definition hostile to every aspect of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and should be dumped.
While this story is mostly focused on the obvious fact that the Democrats were outright lying when they claimed, before the FISA memo was released, that its release would reveal information that would place the country’s security at risk, it is this tidbit that I want to focus on:
But speaking of stupid, something else occurred that few are mentioning, but may be of more significance than anything. What were these FISA judges thinking who allowed for the surveillance? They actually read the Steele dossier, one would assume. Were they imbeciles or as biased as McCabe, Strzok and the rest of that seedy FBI cabal? Whether they were told that document came from the Clinton campaign or not, it read like an outtake from the back pages of the National Enquirer — and not one of the good issues (John Edwards, etc.). The dossier was ludicrous on its face, yet the supposedly great legal minds of the FISA court accepted it as what appears to be the most important evidence for the case.
Think about that.
What we need, obviously, is the old word transparency. The public needs to see the full details of what went into the FISA decisions — and we don’t need to hear any of that fake palaver about national security. Everybody’s security depends on the FISA court working in a one-hundred percent unbiased manner. Otherwise we’re living a nightmare.
That court, and its workings, and its personnel should be a key part of any investigation going forward. New rules and regulations have to be put in place.
The author is thinking “reform.” We must dig into the workings of the FISA court and fix it so this kind of corruption never happens again.
Bah. What this scandal reveals is that the FISA law, created in 1978 during the Carter administration by a Congress strongly controlled by leftwing Democrats (following heavy election loses to the Republicans after Watergate) is itself a problem, and should be gotten rid of. The idea that a warrant against an American can be issued using secret information that no one is allowed to look at reeks with the possibility of abuse and corruption, which is exactly what we see here.
For example, the eleven judges presently on the FISA court were all appointed during the Obama administration. Though the law says the Chief Justice of the U.S. designates them, the law tilts the scale by requiring that “the judges must be drawn from at least seven of the United States judicial circuits, and three of the judges must reside within 20 miles of the District of Columbia.” Considering the political leanings of the DC area, it seems to me that this is going to make it very easy for the court to lean left politically.
No amount of dressing is going to fix this. The FISA court is essentially a Star Chamber where government operatives can use secret information to manipulate the court to allow them to go after their enemies. It is by definition hostile to every aspect of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and should be dumped.